General requirements for the competence of testing and calibration laboratories

What an assessment is actually looking at

Not the result. The assessment looks at whether the laboratory can demonstrate that a result is what it says it is: that the method was valid for the purpose, the equipment was fit and calibrated, the person performing it was competent, the conditions were within limits, and the whole chain can be reconstructed afterwards.

Impartiality and confidentiality

The standard opens with them for a reason. Pressures on impartiality have to be identified and managed — commercial pressure on a technician to report a pass is the obvious one and it is rarely written down anywhere. Where an organisation both performs the work and inspects it, this is the requirement that matters most.

Equipment and traceability

Measuring equipment must be calibrated where the calibration affects the validity of the result, with metrological traceability to the SI. Intermediate checks between calibrations are required where they are needed to maintain confidence.

The practical consequence in the field: an instrument whose calibration has lapsed invalidates work done with it. Discovering that after the reports have gone out means recalling them.

Reporting

Reports must carry what is needed to interpret them: the method, the conditions where relevant, the identification of what was tested, the date, and a clear statement of results. Where a statement of conformity is given, the decision rule used has to be documented and applied consistently — a requirement that is easy to state and often absent in practice.

Amendments

An issued report is amended by a further document that supersedes it and says so. It is not edited in place. This is one of the places where a document system and a filing system diverge sharply: a filing system lets you replace a file, and an accredited laboratory must not.